Diane Ravitch’s take on TIMSS
From guest blogger Diane Ravitch, a Fordham board member and research professor at NYU:
I respectfully disagree with the Fordham view on the TIMSS results, especially the conclusion that the small gains posted by 8th grade students in math are “noteworthy.” The gains registered over the past four years are actually small, only four points.
The gains posted by 8th graders are certainly not a vindication of No Child Left Behind’s testing regime. Eighth-graders registered a 12-point gain in math from 1995-2003, before the imposition of NCLB testing. They posted a 4-point gain from 2003-2007. The students who were tested by TIMSS in 2007 had been subject to NCLB annual tests in every year from third grade onward, yet their scores did not show a dramatic improvement. If anything, the gains were no greater (and possibly smaller) than those registered pre-NCLB.
Also, I would point out that Minnesota showed dramatic gains on TIMMS not because of “new, more rigorous standards,” but because of that state’s decision to implement a coherent grade-by-grade curriculum in mathematics. William Schmidt took the lead in developing that curriculum and deserves to bask in glory for what he has done for the children of Minnesota. That is the most important lesson of 2007 TIMSS for the United States.
Related posts:
- Just in time for the holidays, Diane Ravitch sends Joel Klein a little love
- Diane Ravitch on “The Massachusetts Miracle and the Teachers Union”
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
December 9th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
I would like to know how many U.S. schools were tested and how were the students picked to take the test. I work in a middle school – students in our district were not tested. In the past, students were hand picked (from the top) to participate in the NAEP. My guess is the TIMSS U.S. results do not reflect a true picture of math and science education – I believe they are probably inflated because of the test taker selection process.
December 11th, 2008 at 6:20 am
Thank you for pointing out these very important facts that have not yet been discussed in any newpaper articles.
I would love to read more of Diane’s insight on these results.
Thanks again!